MyWiki:WikiProject Christianity/Cleanup/Archive 1

Archive 1

May 2009

• Booth College - layout, no references

• I made some minor corrections, but the article needs some TLC. APK lives in a very, very Mad World 04:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

April 2008

• Prophecy, section on Christian view of prophecy needs improving. Needs to include NT interpretation of prophecy, and early church to contemporary examples. POV battles have messed up the article. Article heavily dominated by editors who are putting Judaism POV often at expense of Christian, handle carefully as they are excellent, if pedantic, debators. To improve article need to make sure that we are balanced and careful. Paulrach (talk) 14:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Didn't notice entry further down page for same article Paulrach (talk) 14:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Have updated the section on the New Testament as it was quite unreadable. Have spilt it into logical sections that relate more fully to the appropriate sections of the NT. Still to do in this section:

• Need to provide citations for references that were already in text, ie destruction of the temple, return of son of Man, John the Baptist.
• The section on Acts may need more input.
• Have not touched section on prophecy in Revelation.
• Need to expand section on prophecy from the Pauline Epistles.

Paulrach (talk) 15:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

As Paulrach points out, this article is undergoing major POV battles and changes at this very moment. I have a feeling several people will be needed to find NPOV citations and have graceful content disputes. TrickyApron (talk) 02:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

What is way forward with this. I have had several long discussion with an editor who seem unwilling to move on his position and seems to want to turn this article into one on the experience of prophecy. Also there is a tendency to diminish NT sources. This seems to me to be against the spirit of WIkipedia. Any thoughts? Paulrach (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I would love to help out but am entering finals week. My main suggestion would be to find some sourced material and just fight for its inclusion. Few people are going to be able to arbitrate a discussion on what exactly prophecy means, but every wikipedian can see the value of verifiable sources. TrickyApron (talk) 15:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good, that might take time...I think by it's very nature prophecy is difficult to verify. Hope all goes well with your finals. Paulrach (talk) 16:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Good point. :) The Prophecy entry in any Christian bible dictionary would be a good starting place to describe an alternative POV to the one in the article. TrickyApron (talk) 02:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

• George Ashmore Fitch, fascinating personage, could use a little deeper work Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 00:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

December 2007

• Lutheranism - POV and messy, too many Bible verses are quoted in order to support the 'Doctrines' section. This may conflict with WP:NOR as well as WP:NPOV. Also, there are Bible references in the 'References' section. Ekantik ^talk 01:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I looked throught the article and didn't find no bible verses I dunno about the references Smartpotatoe (talk) 01:20, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

October 2007

• Purgatory - POV, plus POV battles have messed up the article. Jonathan Tweet 01:37, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• Any discussion of Purgatory necessarily entails multiple POVs. The division of the article by denomination seems to demarcate the major differences, but the talk page indicates on-going battles among RC editors who cite sources some would consider outdated, while others counter with poorly documented responses. What do you think might be done to improve it? Lambert OP (talk) 04:41, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

September 2007

• Prophecy - It's not a Christianity-specific article, but it's nonetheless a mess at the moment, and I suspect someone here might be able to get into better shape. MisfitToys 23:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

• Got started. Lots to do. Jonathan Tweet 05:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

April 2007

April 24, 2007

• Religous and physiological views of near-death experiences - The article is generally sloppy, and there are numerous links to non-existent people, such as Dr. Jansen, the supposed psychologist. T 12:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Archive 1